... one can add me to the: Jackson, in general, is 'not' subtle list; however long or short such a list might be at the moment.

But if we have a poll as to whether he is subtle or un, I suggest that one of the choices be C) 'about as subtle as an axe in the head' because that's a good tie to the new films in my opinion, subtle or not.

For Galadriel to seem like the most potent force of magic imaginable whilst poor
[In reply to]

Can't Post

old Gandalf and even Saruman are made to look like rank amateurs by comparison . . . ahhh, I would rather not see that.

In Reply To

And it could probably be avoided quite easily.

Ignoring Galadriel for a second, Elrond and Gandalf would fight with their swords. We've seen them both do it in the trilogy, so there would be no need to have magic shooting out of their fingers and toes. I assume they will battle whoever's there - orcs, wargs, mewlips, wights, Bombadil and even possibly Ringwraiths.

Adding Galadriel into the battle is a bit of an unknown. She could fight with a sword, but I can't see it happening. I don't know about you, but when I think of Lady Galadriel at Dol Guldur, this image comes into my head.

So, while Elrond and Gandalf are giving it all they've got, Galadriel could enter Dol Guldur, conjure up some spell (perhaps right in front of the Necromancer), cleansing it? The Necromancer flees, and Galadriel plants an Elanor flower?

Something like that?

"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."

"...Celeborn came forth and led the host of Lórien over Anduin in many boats. They took Dol Guldur, and Galadriel threw down its walls and laid bare its pits, and the forest was cleansed." (LotR, App. B).

Joint effort in the war by Celeborn & Galadriel, and Galadriel cleans up the pollution. Regarding actual combat, in one of his last notes on the history of this pair, Tolkien describes Galadriel and Celeborn fightng heroically to defend Alqualondë when Fëanor and his crusaders turn up (Unfinished Tales, "History of Galadriel & Celeborn"). This implies that Galadriel could swing a sword or use a bow. Welcome to the Mordorfone network, where we put the 'hai' back into Uruk

I reckon Galadriel's display of power at Dol Guldur was more along the lines of Lúthien bringing the walls of Tol-in-Gaurhoth down (The Sil, 'Of Beren & Lúthien'):

"Then Lúthien stood upon the bridge, and declared her power: and the spell was loosed that bound stone to stone, and the gates were thrown down, and the walls opened, and the pits laid bare..."

Tolkien used the same language to describe Galadriel's feat - notice the recycling: "threw down its walls and laid bare its pits" (Galadriel) / "the gates were thrown down, and the walls opened, and the pits laid bare" (Lúthien).

No need for fireballs, or summoning Elementals or Djinns or drolems! Jackson could still shoot a cataclysmic CGI scene and still keep it in the legendarium, and to better visual effect.

Regarding fireballs at the Battle of Alqualondë, if that was the case it would have been one big magic festival! Galadriel and Fëanor and Fingolfin using fireballs, Olwë and the Teleri using water magic etc.

Alternatively, we have these passages describing the Kinslaying (The Sil, 'Of the Flight of the Noldor')

"...swords were drawn, and a bitter fight was fought upon the ships"

"and the Teleri had less strength, and were armed for the most part but with with slender bows." Welcome to the Mordorfone network, where we put the 'hai' back into Uruk

I'm not really a fan of Harry Potter, but I got dragged into watching one of them the other day, and while reading through the thread a section of the film came to mind. At 2:21 in this clip, the way Voldemort builds up the power and then unleashing it to such destructive effect, could perhaps work well with Galadriel where she "threw down its walls and laid bare its pits". Its not too outlandish and 'magicy', and can fit quite nicely into the tone of the films. (There is a bit of a simmilar effect during the prolouge of the Fellowship of the ring with the last alliance as Sauron is defeated.)

Regarding actual combat, in one of his last notes on the history of this pair, Tolkien describes Galadriel and Celeborn fightng heroically to defend Alqualondë when Fëanor and his crusaders turn up (Unfinished Tales, "History of Galadriel & Celeborn"). This implies that Galadriel could swing a sword or use a bow.

This is true. Although I find something interesting about this revision, noting first that in this late version Galadriel is not part of the Noldorin Rebellion but just happens to be at Swanhaven when Feanor attacks (it might also be noted that Tolkien already had Galadriel defending Swanhaven, when she was 'still' in the Rebellion of the Noldor).

What I find interesting is that in this very latest version Tolkien appears to have desired to remove Galadriel from the Rebellion because he wants to make her 'unstained' at this point (probably forgetting that he had already published that she was a leader in the Rebellion in any case). And the so called 'revision' is with respect to Galadriel's initial entrance into the tale of the Elder Days in the early 1950s, where she takes no part in the battle of Swanhaven, as the children of Finarfin simply arrive too late to do anything (the 1977 Silmarillion of course makes no mention of Galadriel defending Swanhaven).

This ultimately means that Tolkien's 'unstained' Galadriel is now going to fight, and not against orcs or any other monsters of Morgoth, but against other Elves.

Did Galadriel in fact slay Elves; or was her heroic 'fight' of a purely defensive nature?

However Tolkien saw Galadriel's defense he is also possibly thinking, at least in some measure here, of the Virgin Mary (considering his late letter to Lord Halsbury on making Galadriel unstained, if I recall correctly), and I sometimes wonder if he was actually putting Elven blood on Galadriel's hands here, as it would seem, I admit, even in the defense of the Teleri.

OK it's not really about the film. It's just my annoying aside. Wait... there's a film!?

I suppose it's possible to mount a heroic defence without killing anybody but it seems unlikley - the Noldorin rebels wanted the ships of the Teleri and the accounts of the Kinslaying are descriptive enough to indicate that blood was shed during the standoff. If Galadriel resisted the seizures, she may well have had to kill.

I agree though, that reconciling this with the later, 'unstained' version of Galadriel is tricky (the 1973 Lord Halsbury correspondence indeed, Letter 353 - nice citation Elthir!). In that letter, Tolkien states that "she [Galadriel] had committed no evil deeds". Sometimes Tolkien's revisions just can't be squared but perhaps in this case we could take it to mean that "evil deeds" refer to the transgression of those Noldor who not only attacked Alqualondë but also failed to repent once the Prophecy of the North was handed down by Mandos. Finarfin repented and returned to Valinor. Galadriel presumably never had the chance to do so (in this version she and Celebron sailed separately and would never have encountered Mandos).

An aside, Galadriel, as described in The Grey Annals (back to the 1950s), was very coy when questioned by Melian about what took place back in Valinor and despite being pressed would not speak of the Kinslaying, simply hinting a dark deeds. Not exactly the behaviour of someone 'unstained'! Over the decades Tolkien went on quite a journey with this character. Welcome to the Mordorfone network, where we put the 'hai' back into Uruk

In that letter, Tolkien states that "she [Galadriel] had committed no evil deeds". Sometimes Tolkien's revisions just can't be squared but perhaps in this case we could take it to mean that "evil deeds" refer to the transgression of those Noldor who not only attacked Alqualondë but also failed to repent once the Prophecy of the North was handed down by Mandos. Finarfin repented and returned to Valinor. Galadriel presumably never had the chance to do so (in this version she and Celebron sailed separately and would never have encountered Mandos).

Yes I think Tolkien was focusing on these things and her [now former] part in the Rebellion in general (again, seemingly forgetting what he had published in The Road Goes Ever On). Regarding my earlier mention of Mary however, I just checked letters and the Virgin Mary comparison is referenced in earlier letters, but not actually in the late Lord Halsbury letter itself (the one you noted for me), and in the latest reference to Mary (in letters), Galadriel was still a leader in the Rebellion in Tolkien's mind.

I wonder if Mary along with Galadriel had come up when Tolkien and Lord Halsbury talked (just before Tolkien's letter), but maybe that will never be known.

Quote

An aside, Galadriel, as described in The Grey Annals (back to the 1950s), was very coy when questioned by Melian about what took place back in Valinor and despite being pressed would not speak of the Kinslaying, simply hinting a dark deeds. Not exactly the behaviour of someone 'unstained'! Over the decades Tolkien went on quite a journey with this character.

I rather like the early 1950s scenario (in the 1977 Silmarillion), and not that you said otherwise, but even though Galadriel did not want to speak of certain things to Melian, at this point it seems Tolkien imagined that she had yet no part in the Kinslaying. I say that because not only did the earlier Silmarillion of the mid to later 1930s (again if I recall correctly) note that Finrod (Finarfin's) children had not taken part in this deed (Galadriel not being one of his children yet, in any case), but in the later text Concerning Galadriel and Celeborn, Finarfin's children are noted as having had no part in the Kinslaying.

If memory serves this text is later than that which describes Galadriel and Melian's speech together, somewhat after the early 1950s anyway.